Linked API MCP

retrieve_performance

Retrieve performance analytics from your LinkedIn dashboard to track metrics and optimize content strategy.

Instructions

Allows you to retrieve performance analytics from your LinkedIn dashboard (st.retrievePerformance action).

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "retrieve_performance"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedAug 23, 2025

TDQS

B3/5.0

Behavior2/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully convey behavioral traits. It only states retrieval, implying read-only, but does not explicitly disclose permissions, rate limits, or whether the action is destructive. The lack of detail fails to adequately inform the agent.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single sentence that is front-loaded and contains no redundant information. It is efficient for the purpose, but could benefit from slightly more detail without becoming verbose.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given no output schema and zero parameters, the description should explain what performance analytics entail (e.g., metrics, time ranges). It fails to provide this context, leaving the agent unaware of what the tool returns. For a simple retrieval, it is incomplete.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema has zero parameters and 100% coverage. The description adds no parameter information, which is acceptable since there are none. Following the baseline rule for 0 parameters, a score of 4 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool retrieves 'performance analytics from your LinkedIn dashboard', which is a specific verb+resource. It differentiates from sibling tools like retrieve_connections or retrieve_ssi. However, it does not specify what kind of performance (e.g., post, account), leaving some ambiguity.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. No when-not conditions or exclusions are mentioned. The agent must infer usage solely from the tool name and description, which is insufficient.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.